Discussion

Discrimination is described as an unequal treatment of people or groups based on their behavior, race or ethnicity (Andersen & Taylor, 2007). Andersen and Taylor (2007) also discuss that this phenomenon can be manifested in the stereotypes that can be evident in different age groups. For instance, an individual may be singled out in executing a major task because of his or her age or gender. In such a situation, an action or practice that appears to exclude the disadvantaged from what the rest are doing can be perceived as discrimination. The contemporary society exhibits such inequality in various ways that may be regarded as positive or negative discrimination. Andersen and Taylor (2007) affirm that when an individual is selected in his or her personal favor this can be described as an affirmative action. As a matter of fact, people have different understanding when it comes to racial discrimination. Andersen and Taylor (2007) point out that the racial discrimination involves an explicit, direct hostility that the whites express towards the minorities. However, this perspective appears wrong because this term includes more than just a direct behavior that people can express to others. Discrimination can also occur in an unconscious and a subtle manner. For instance, an interviewer’s initial bias based on race can be communicated non-verbally to the interviewee through a patronizing attitude and cutting the interview short. Racial discrimination may also be manifested in the distribution of public resources and healthcare accessibility. For instance, making the health facilities available to areas inhabited by people of a particular race and discriminating other areas because of the race of their populations.

Tribal stigma can be described as spreading stereotypic information that can be regarded as defamatory for people of a specific ethnic group. Erving Goffman’s theory defines this term as the socially discrediting behavior or an attribute that classifies a particular group of people in an undesirable way. The consequences of tribal stigma is mostly low self-esteem among the affected group. Bos, Pryor, Reeder and Stutterheim (2013) discuss that tribal stigma can be transmitted through lineages and can have detrimental impacts on all the family members. The attitudes that a person can hold towards the tribe being stigmatized depends on the social aspect evident in that ethnic group. For instance, the misconceptions can be related to the religious affiliations that the affected ethnic group holds. Therefore, basing on the stereotypic assumptions, the society tends to believe that representatives of other ethnicities are not humans. Bos et al. (2013) discuss that people are prone to develop stigma-theory ideologies that explain inferiority and account for the threat of hatred and conflicts that may arise as a result. Furthermore, the contemporary society has the tendency of discrediting other people which affects even their ability to develop socially. An attribute that stigmatizes one individual can confirm the usualness of another hence not creditable. For instance, Bos et al. (2013) discuss that some job positions in the US cause the undocumented people from a specific ethnic background without remarkable college qualification to conceal this fact because of the stigma in the society. This aspect implies that tribal stigma can lead to racial discrimination. It is based on the fact that when one group of people acts in a manner that blemishes or causes harm to the wellbeing of other tribes, retaliation is likely to arise in the process. Tribal stigma can also have detrimental effects on the peaceful coexistence in a society. It may lead to the inferior group or the stigmatized tribe reacting in a violent manner, especially when the latter are not comfortable with the discrimination they are subjected to in the process.

Religion as the opium of the people is an ideology started by Karl Marx to explain religion from the perspective material realities and the economic injustices promoted by people (Ott, 2007). It is mostly used by the oppressors to make individuals who are oppressed in the society feel much better in the context of exploitation. Therefore, the statement that religion is the opium of the people simply implies that humanity depends on religion for hope and consolation for the exploitative behavior experienced as a result of the social injustices. The belief in the significance of religion depends on an individual’s self-consciousness. If to analyze this idea critically, it becomes clear that Karl Marx was critical of religion by quoting this statement. Ott (2007) discusses that Marx portrays religion as an oppressed creature where the heart of the heartless world lies. It would be very difficult to convince the contemporary society that this idea is right because of the environment in which they are born. For instance, an individual born and brought up in the Muslim or Christianity religion may not agree with the idea of its abolition. Therefore, religion appears like an illusion which the whole society has to follow. However, its primary purpose is to create illusory fantasies for the poor in the context of economic realities. The latter, from this perspective, prevent people from finding the true happiness in life. Just like an ill person depends on the opiate drugs for relief in pain and other ailments, the same aspect is reflected in the religion where people are expected to draw their happiness. However, in reality, that is not the case, because religion is not the ultimate solution for the oppressed. Their relief comes from the mind and region is only there to help them forget about the underlying pain of distress. Therefore, people live in an imaginary future without oppression they experience and sufferings derived from economic inequalities.